Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the magistrate/court concerned, subject to conditions: (i) not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, charged in Case Crime No.1583 of 2019 (Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow) and in custody since 17.10.2020 without framing of charges or commencement of trial, should be enlarged on bail.

Court's answer

Since the purpose of keeping an under trial person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial, and the trial has not even commenced despite more than four years having elapsed since the applicant was taken into custody (with even charges not framed till date), the facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application stands allowed; the applicant is to be released on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the magistrate/court concerned, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence, (ii) he shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses, and (iii) he shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 4044 of 2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:27322), decided 9.5.2025 by Subhash Vidyarthi, J., High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench. Applicant Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava sought bail in Case Crime No.1583 of 2019 (Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow), an F.I.R.-based case alleging non-payment of returns on investments in a project of Shine City Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Company. Per affidavit, the applicant was Additional Director from 17.03.2016 to 05.12.2019, claims false implication, and is roped into more than 220 F.I.R.s concerning the company; counsel stated he already held bail in about 100 cases. The AGA opposed, submitting the applicant is involved in a large scale financial fraud affecting a very large number of persons, but could not refute that the applicant languished in jail since 17.10.2020 without even charges being framed. Court's reasoning: the purpose of keeping an under trial in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial; as the trial had not commenced after more than four years of custody, the facts sufficed for enlargement on bail. Bail granted on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions: no tampering with prosecution evidence, no pressurizing prosecution witnesses, and appearance on every date fixed by the trial court.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27322

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4044 of 2025

Applicant :- Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Mitra Anand,Utkarsh Anand Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rohit Tripathi

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

Heard Shri Desh Mitra Anand, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Akhilesh Kumar Vyas, learned A.G.A.-I for the State, Shri Rohit Tripathi, the learned counsel for the Enforcement Directorate and perused the records.

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.1583 of 2019, under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow.

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. alleging that the informant had made some investment in a Project of Shine City Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Company but no return was paid on his investment.

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been stated that the applicant was an Additional Director of the Company since 17.03.2016 and he had resigned from the aforesaid position on 05.12.2019. It has further been stated in the affidavit that the applicant had no previous criminal history but as per his knowledge, he has been roped in more than 220 F.I.R.s registered under different police stations and the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that all the F.I.R.s relate to disputes regarding Shine City Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Company only.

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been granted bail in about 100 cases.

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the applicant is involved in a large scale financial fraud affecting a very large number of persons and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail. However, he could not refute the submissions of the learned

counsel for the applicant that although the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.10.2020, even charges have not been framed till date.

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the purpose of keeping an under trial person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and the trial has not even commenced in spite of a period of more than four years has been elapsed since the applicant was taken into custody, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

Let the applicant- Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

Order Date :- 9.5.2025 -Amit K-

Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench